MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393407675 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0299888

Musical instrument classifier for early childhood percussion instruments

2024· article· en· W4393407675 on OpenAlexafffund
Brandon Rufino, Ajmal Khan, Tilak Dutta, Elaine Biddiss

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoBloorview Research InstituteOntario Brain Institute
KeywordsPercussionMusical instrumentComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceMel-frequency cepstrumFeature vectorSpeech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the musical instrument classification task is well-studied, there remains a gap in identifying non-pitched percussion instruments which have greater overlaps in frequency bands and variation in sound quality and play style than pitched instruments. In this paper, we present a musical instrument classifier for detecting tambourines, maracas and castanets, instruments that are often used in early childhood music education. We generated a dataset with diverse instruments (e.g., brand, materials, construction) played in different locations with varying background noise and play styles. We conducted sensitivity analyses to optimize feature selection, windowing time, and model selection. We deployed and evaluated our best model in a mixed reality music application with 12 families in a home setting. Our dataset was comprised of over 369,000 samples recorded in-lab and 35,361 samples recorded with families in a home setting. We observed the Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM) model to perform best using an approximate 93 ms window with only 12 mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs) and signal entropy. Our best LGBM model was observed to perform with over 84% accuracy across all three instrument families in-lab and over 73% accuracy when deployed to the home. To our knowledge, the dataset compiled of 369,000 samples of non-pitched instruments is first of its kind. This work also suggests that a low feature space is sufficient for the recognition of non-pitched instruments. Lastly, real-world deployment and testing of the algorithms created with participants of diverse physical and cognitive abilities was also an important contribution towards more inclusive design practices. This paper lays the technological groundwork for a mixed reality music application that can detect children's use of non-pitched, percussion instruments to support early childhood music education and play.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207